Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

In the 4 years prior to joining the SEC, A&M's composite 247 recruiting ranking was 23.25. It is 15.6 for the six classes signed since. How much of that is due to perception and facilities upgrades is anyone's guess. Based on head-to-head competition, Arkansas and A&M are still similar programs, in my opinion, given that 3 of the last 4 games have gone to OT on a neutral field.

In the 4 years prior to joining the SEC, A&M's composite 247 recruiting ranking was 23.25. It is 15.6 for the six classes signed since. How much of that is due to perception and facilities upgrades is anyone's guess. Based on head-to-head competition, Arkansas and A&M are still similar programs, in my opinion, given that 3 of the last 4 games have gone to OT on a neutral field.

I tend to agree with you on the OT games, but it really sucks how every OT game seems to go to them.

6 games in a row is too many, and since Morris is rebuilding this year it will probably be at least 7 before we can snag one. I'd like to win before it goes to a full decade against the Ags.

In the 4 years prior to joining the SEC, A&M's composite 247 recruiting ranking was 23.25. It is 15.6 for the six classes signed since. How much of that is due to perception and facilities upgrades is anyone's guess. Based on head-to-head competition, Arkansas and A&M are still similar programs, in my opinion, given that 3 of the last 4 games have gone to OT on a neutral field.

Sherman may have been a poor on the field coach, but his staff could and did somehow recruit at a high level; Sumlin benefited greatly from that. Moreover, he had the good fortune to inherit a once in a generation talent at QB.

Just blind-ass good luck in the timing for A&M. Had the Aggies joined the SEC 3 or 4 years earlier, they'd have had their asses handed to them and probably never signed Manziel.

In the 4 years prior to joining the SEC, A&M's composite 247 recruiting ranking was 23.25. It is 15.6 for the six classes signed since. How much of that is due to perception and facilities upgrades is anyone's guess. Based on head-to-head competition, Arkansas and A&M are still similar programs, in my opinion, given that 3 of the last 4 games have gone to OT on a neutral field.

Their recruiting improved, that's just a fact as evidenced by the large number of high profile NFL draft picks they have had. How much that is because of the SEC vs. how bad the have been is open to debate.

The real question is will their recruiting regress to their historical averages (which typically are still pretty good) now that seems to be on the upswing?

From A&M's perspective they HAD to do something to get away from UT. Until they got out of the shadow of Austin, the little brother syndrome was never going to go away.

From Arkansas's perspective, A&M joining the SEC has been nothing but bad for us.

Correct. Sadly at the time, a large number of Hog fans lacked the perspective to understand how the move could be bad for us and instead were thrilled by the shorter run way aTm had said, "See ya!" to UT.

Correct. Sadly at the time, a large number of Hog fans lacked the perspective to understand how the move could be bad for us and instead were thrilled by the shorter run way aTm had said, "See ya!" to UT.

So, even if this large number of Hog fans you refer to would have had a different perspective, what could they have done to prevent aTm from joining the league? Absolutely nothing.

I really wish they hadn't moved to the SEC. Texas A&M coming to our conference was the second worse thing that could have happened to Arkansas! UT-Austin coming to the SEC would have been the worst! A&M being in the SEC directly and adversely affects Arkansas' recruiting, especially in football. 6 losses in a row, now. Granted, the Hogs should have won half of those games, just like they should have beaten Alabama in 2007, 2010, and 2014, but instead it's 11 in a row to the Tide. If A&M had stayed in the Big XII, I am positive that a number of the players they signed over the last five or six years would have signed with Arkansas (or other SEC schools) for a chance to play in the SEC.

I was all for it, of course that was when we were beating them every year. I figured if those Texas recruits tuned in to see the SEC Aggies and watched them get their ass handed to them by Arkansas it would help us in the long term. But that before we hired fat boy.....

If Fisher plateaued at FSU and Morris is as good as we all hope he is, it could still work out for us.

Correct. Sadly at the time, a large number of Hog fans lacked the perspective to understand how the move could be bad for us and instead were thrilled by the shorter run way aTm had said, "See ya!" to UT.

Indeed. I knew TAMU joining was going to be bad for us. We went from being the NWern most outpost in the SEC to just a school in between Mizzou and TAMU.

TAMU was a sleeping giant that needed this move unfortunately. They have the facilities and fanbase to compete in the SEC. Texas kids do not have to leave Texas to play in the SEC anymore. This move really put a hurt on Arkansas. And if we ever expanded in the future and brought over Oklahoma to the SEC, well, Arkansas would have a hard time winning, period..

And if we ever expanded in the future and brought over Oklahoma to the SEC, well, Arkansas would have a hard time winning, period..

That might be true if we look at it from just our perspective. But it could also work out to be the best thing for the conference and it could put it so far ahead of the Big Ten that theyíd never catch up. It would be hard to turn this down. Plus I donít see anyway we could stop it.

In my opinion losing six in a row was not because A&M joined the SEC but was more a result of us having the wrong coaches. We had a winning record against A&M when we were both in the SWC. We will know more over the next few years with a change in both coaching staffs. When we could only beat Coastal Carolina by one point tells me all I need to know. I predict a positive change coming soon.

Why do folks ignore the context of the aTm/UA series? I'll never know. Arkansas hasn't lost to aTm 6x in a row "just because" aTm joined the SEC.

Yes, UA has lost to aTm the six times in a row-- 4 having been really close games. But for crying out loud, how many close games did CBB lose? All of them, I think. His record against Miz and MSU is flat-out disturbing. Was JLS's coaching year a great example of UA's capability to compete in this series?

Arkansas's longest tenured coach in the SEC? Houston Nutt. Best coach? BP. Jeebus, do you really think either of those guys lose to aTm 6X in a row?? BP, in fact, never lost to aTm. Houston at least understood you win with speed.

In my opinion losing six in a row was not because A&M joined the SEC but was more a result of us having the wrong coaches. We had a winning record against A&M when we were both in the SWC. We will know more over the next few years with a change in both coaching staffs. When we could only beat Coastal Carolina by one point tells me all I need to know. I predict a positive change coming soon.

Why do folks ignore the context of the aTm/UA series? I'll never know. Arkansas hasn't lost to aTm 6x in a row "just because" aTm joined the SEC.

Yes, UA has lost to aTm the six times in a row-- 4 having been really close games. But for crying out loud, how many close games did CBB lose? All of them, I think. His record against Miz and MSU is flat-out disturbing. Was JLS's coaching year a great example of UA's capability to compete in this series?

Arkansas's longest tenured coach in the SEC? Houston Nutt. Best coach? BP. Jeebus, do you really think either of those guys lose to aTm 6X in a row?? BP, in fact, never lost to aTm. Houston at least understood you win with speed.

It was a good move for them and Mizzou at the time. But the world of college football has changed since then. Now we have a contract bowls, a playoff, and conference championship games with less than 12 members. We also have new media platforms that are biding for content.

It was a good move for them and Mizzou at the time. But the world of college football has changed since then. Now we have a contract bowls, a playoff, and conference championship games with less than 12 members. We also have new media platforms that are biding for content.

The same reasons in place when they moved then are still in place now. The would still make that move today.

I think that it obviously has been a good move for A&M. In fact, the exit of Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska and A&M has turned out to be a good thing for the Big 12 as well. The Big 12 would otherwise not have had the opportunity to have the epiphany that the conference overall is about more than just Texas and Oklahoma.

Now would it potentially be better for A&M in the Big 12 if they (and others) returned to the Big 12 now and helped save the conference? Yes, and a return of Nebraska, Missouri and A&M (along with the addition of Arkansas) would create a shift in the overall political dominance that Oklahoma and Texas have enjoyed all of these years. Why? Because those teams would not return or be added unless the conference guaranteed that change and for that conference to survive, they would need to add 4 teams of that level. It will probably never happen, but it should.

The same reasons in place when they moved then are still in place now. The would still make that move today.

I doubt it. It was Deloss Dodd and ESPN that made the Big 12 unbearable for A&M. But today we know that the Longhorn Network is a nothing burger that is bleeding ESPN. Dodd and his huge ego has since moved on and the situation with Texas and the rest of the Big 12 has changed dramatically.

Logged

Cinco de Hogo

I was listen to a national talk show last week and they were talking about Nebraskaís attempt to schedule more Big 12 opponents like Colorado, Kansas and Kansas State. Seems they are missing their old rivals(you know the ones they could beat). I think itís natural after 50-100 years that it would be hard to just forget the past.

I was listen to a national talk show last week and they were talking about Nebraskaís attempt to schedule more Big 12 opponents like Colorado, Kansas and Kansas State. Seems they are missing their old rivals(you know the ones they could beat). I think itís natural after 50-100 years that it would be hard to just forget the past.

I doubt it. It was Deloss Dodd and ESPN that made the Big 12 unbearable for A&M. But today we know that the Longhorn Network is a nothing burger that is bleeding ESPN. Dodd and his huge ego has since moved on and the situation with Texas and the rest of the Big 12 has changed dramatically.

The little 12 is still unbearable even with the GOR. Who do you think wanted the GOR the way it is. The horns. The rest of the stuff is just a facade to make people think itís a great conference. With a couple of exceptions the rest of the conference still has to go along with what the horns say and want. Heck OU still has people of influence taking about leaving at some point. If the SEC, PAC 12 or Big10 offered any other school they would still jump if the GOR wasnít in place. Thatís about the only thing holding it togeather as is. Some schools know they wouldnít have anywhere better to land and thus went along with it.

The little 12 is still unbearable even with the GOR. Who do you think wanted the GOR the way it is. The horns. The rest of the stuff is just a facade to make people think itís a great conference. With a couple of exceptions the rest of the conference still has to go along with what the horns say and want. Heck OU still has people of influence taking about leaving at some point. If the SEC, PAC 12 or Big10 offered any other school they would still jump if the GOR wasnít in place. Thatís about the only thing holding it togeather as is. Some schools know they wouldnít have anywhere better to land and thus went along with it.

The Big 12 members voted to not extend their GOR's. There is probably a good reason for that. Between now and then I suspect that there will be a lot of back channel conversations between the member schools and among the member schools and other conferences. Assuming for the moment that the Big 12 is unable to persuade other schools to leave their current conference affiliation and join the Big 12, one has to speculate as to where the current 10 members might land should the conference fold.

The Big Ten would probably be happy to snatch up two AAU schools who would add to their conference from a basketball and wrestling standpoint in Kansas and Iowa State, who for the most part, would become rent-a-wins in football. But their academics and AAU affiliations mean a lot to the Big Ten.

Oklahoma and perhaps Oklahoma State, maybe even TCU instead of Oklahoma State, could become SEC members. The addition of TCU would balance the SEC divisions out by putting a private school in the West opposite Vandy in the East. Of course TCU is a lot more competitive in football than Vandy, but the SEC would love that making the SEC West remain the toughest division in all of college football.

Texas will probably go independent making another ego-fueled mistake as they did with the LHN, but you never know, the Pac 12 might love to add them, along with their AAU status and academics. But who goes with them?

Probably not Oklahoma State who doesn't posess the academics that the Pac 12 might desire. Texas Tech? Perhaps they are in the same boat?

Who does that leave? Baylor and K-State? Baylor has the academics but bears a very public black-eye and K-State brings nothing to the table in terms of academics. I think the Pac 12 views K-State as being "beneath" them in terms of membership.

And West Virginia, who would want them? The ACC? Maybe that is really the best and most logical fit for them? It certainly is from a regional standpoint, but who else would the ACC add to balance out that addition?

So laying all of this out and discussing where each team would land, you can see that the demise of the Big 12 would leave a lot of teams holding the bag if other teams departed. That's why I don't think it will happen.

Ultimately the only choice for the Big 12 is to create better revenue packages for their members (that would include equal and enhanced shares for all members) that would help them entice other teams to join.

That is why I think that the closer we get to 2025 and the expiration of the Big 12 GOR's that we may see more overtures being made to Nebraska, Missouri and A&M to rejoin the conference and a strong push put on to add Arkansas. That would be a bold move and would bring the conference to 14 teams and new-found stability that it hasn't experienced in many years.

There would have to be more money added to the revenue packages and Oklahoma and Texas would have to give up some level of power over the conference, but if that happened, I'd be fine with that.

The Big 12 members voted to not extend their GOR's. There is probably a good reason for that. Between now and then I suspect that there will be a lot of back channel conversations between the member schools and among the member schools and other conferences. Assuming for the moment that the Big 12 is unable to persuade other schools to leave their current conference affiliation and join the Big 12, one has to speculate as to where the current 10 members might land should the conference fold.

The Big Ten would probably be happy to snatch up two AAU schools who would add to their conference from a basketball and wrestling standpoint in Kansas and Iowa State, who for the most part, would become rent-a-wins in football. But their academics and AAU affiliations mean a lot to the Big Ten.

Oklahoma and perhaps Oklahoma State, maybe even TCU instead of Oklahoma State, could become SEC members. The addition of TCU would balance the SEC divisions out by putting a private school in the West opposite Vandy in the East. Of course TCU is a lot more competitive in football than Vandy, but the SEC would love that making the SEC West remain the toughest division in all of college football.

Texas will probably go independent making another ego-fueled mistake as they did with the LHN, but you never know, the Pac 12 might love to add them, along with their AAU status and academics. But who goes with them?

Probably not Oklahoma State who doesn't posess the academics that the Pac 12 might desire. Texas Tech? Perhaps they are in the same boat?

Who does that leave? Baylor and K-State? Baylor has the academics but bears a very public black-eye and K-State brings nothing to the table in terms of academics. I think the Pac 12 views K-State as being "beneath" them in terms of membership.

And West Virginia, who would want them? The ACC? Maybe that is really the best and most logical fit for them? It certainly is from a regional standpoint, but who else would the ACC add to balance out that addition?

So laying all of this out and discussing where each team would land, you can see that the demise of the Big 12 would leave a lot of teams holding the bag if other teams departed. That's why I don't think it will happen.

Ultimately the only choice for the Big 12 is to create better revenue packages for their members (that would include equal and enhanced shares for all members) that would help them entice other teams to join.

That is why I think that the closer we get to 2025 and the expiration of the Big 12 GOR's that we may see more overtures being made to Nebraska, Missouri and A&M to rejoin the conference and a strong push put on to add Arkansas. That would be a bold move and would bring the conference to 14 teams and new-found stability that it hasn't experienced in many years.

There would have to be more money added to the revenue packages and Oklahoma and Texas would have to give up some level of power over the conference, but if that happened, I'd be fine with that.

When their GOR expires I believe that some of the schools are not prime candidates for realignment to other P5 conferences. Therefore those that are will gladly jump ship. No reason can be given for those that have already moved a good enough reason to move back. Only the top programs in the little 12 will get gobbled up by other P5 conferences. I do believe Texas and the other Texas schools will try to hold things togeather but they wonít be able to. The only thing I think that would change that is some sort of different revenue plan for them to bring them equal or close to the others for all schools. That is unlikely though imho.

Texas A&M has a winning SEC record, Has gon toe to toe with Alabama a couple years, produced a Heisman, and now has an Elite Coach to accompany the top tier Texas talent that wants to play in the SEC. I'd say they are doing just fine. Their recruiting classes have been better ever since.

Texas A&M has a winning SEC record, Has gon toe to toe with Alabama a couple years, produced a Heisman, and now has an Elite Coach to accompany the top tier Texas talent that wants to play in the SEC. I'd say they are doing just fine. Their recruiting classes have been better ever since.

Your point? If they thought that they were doing "just fine" as it was, they wouldn't have a new HC.

Texas A&M has a winning SEC record, Has gon toe to toe with Alabama a couple years, produced a Heisman, and now has an Elite Coach to accompany the top tier Texas talent that wants to play in the SEC. I'd say they are doing just fine. Their recruiting classes have been better ever since.

They had one great year with a freak player. Since, they have been middle of the pack. Something happens to the bluest of blue chippers once they sign with A&M: They become Aggies.

SEC for aTm was a no brainer. I would not be surprised to see aTm become a top tier SEC team within the next few years. They are a good coach away from being formidable. They lack for nothing to compete, save being aggie.